WASHINGTON, 27 January 2003 — The United States is considering using nuclear weapons in a possible future war on Iraq to destroy underground command posts and stop Iraqi forces from using weapons of mass destruction, a top US private military expert warned yesterday.

Citing multiple sources, William Arkin said plans for using nuclear weapons against Iraq are being fleshed out at the US Strategic Command in Omaha, Nebraska; inside planning offices of the Joint Staff at the Pentagon and at an “undisclosed location” in Pennsylvania where US Vice President Dick Cheney used to spend time during terrorism alerts.

An administration official, who spoke to AFP on condition of anonymity, would not confirm the report, but said that “as in all cases, the United States reserves the right to act in defense of itself and its allies by whatever means necessary.”

Defense Department spokesman Maj. Ted Wadsworth said the reported plan, whose existence he could not confirm, was “something that policymakers have to talk about.” Washington has warned Baghdad that any attempt on its part to resort to weapons of mass destruction might have the most severe consequences, a diplomatic phrase for nuclear strike.

In an article in The Los Angeles Times, Arkin writes that nuclear weapons have always been part of the arsenal discussed by war planners. “But the Bush administration’s decision to actively plan for possible preemptive use of such weapons, especially as so-called bunker busters, against Iraq represents a significant lowering of the nuclear threshold,” he points out.

US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld signed in December 2001 a classified nuclear posture review that opened the possibility for nuclear weapons to be used against targets able to withstand non-nuclear attack and added nations such as Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya and Syria to the list of possible targets.

According to Arkin, the review also called upon the military to develop plans to attack foreign weapons of mass destruction facilities, even if the enemy did not resort to them first.

This work is currently under way at the Strategic Command, which Arkin says has already prepared a “Theater Nuclear Planning Document” to be used by the administration of President George W. Bush and the Central Command, which will be executing an invasion of Iraq if Bush opts for one.

As the Pentagon prepares for a possible military campaign in Iraq, the command, which used to deal exclusively with nuclear-related issues, saw its responsibilities expand, according to the expert.

Last month, Rumsfeld sent Bush a memorandum asking to place Stratcom commander Adm. James Ellis in charge of dealing with foreign weapons of mass destruction and Bush approved the request earlier this month, according to Arkin.

“On the surface, these new assignments give the command a broader set of tools to avoid nuclear escalation,” writes the expert. “In reality, they open the door much wider to contemplating American use of nuclear weapons.”

If there is no early surrender by President Saddam Hussein’s most loyal forces, the endgame could well be played out on the streets of Baghdad. For Washington, it’s a nightmare scenario.

Casualties — both military and civilian — would probably be very high if US troops had to scour an unfamiliar, hostile and sprawling city of five million for diehard members of the Republican Guard hiding and sniping on their own turf.

“If the Americans were wise they would try to avoid it altogether because the casualties would be horrific,” said William Hopkinson of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London. “There would be nothing to gain from this in terms of world headlines. The political tensions caused by chewing up a civilian population would be very bad for the United States, particularly if it went ahead without a UN resolution.” (Agencies)